↓ Skip to main content

‘Caveat emptor’: the cautionary tale of endocarditis and the potential pitfalls of clinical coding data—an electronic health records study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, September 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
‘Caveat emptor’: the cautionary tale of endocarditis and the potential pitfalls of clinical coding data—an electronic health records study
Published in
BMC Medicine, September 2019
DOI 10.1186/s12916-019-1390-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Fawcett, Bernadette Young, Leon Peto, T. Phuong Quan, Richard Gillott, Jianhua Wu, Chris Middlemass, Sheila Weston, Derrick W. Crook, Tim E. A. Peto, Berit Muller-Pebody, Alan P. Johnson, A. Sarah Walker, Jonathan A. T. Sandoe

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Master 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 27 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 29 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2023.
All research outputs
#3,207,201
of 25,173,778 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,949
of 3,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,597
of 346,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#24
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,173,778 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,779 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.